Probably. I don't think there is any period of history that is completely sustainable, because let's face it, capitalism is now essentially referred to as a stage of history beginning with the early stages of the Industrial Revolution. Just the same as Absolutism, Divine Monarchy etc. There are too many reactionary forces that can see whole systems come tumbling down - for example, Absolutism falling with the French Revolution, or Imperial authority with the Byzantines.

Its been going for 400 years so I doubt that its about to go away. Also worth noting that many countries run on strict rules of socialism are still in the 19th century apart from a few that have dragged themselves into the 20th century by introducing a mixed economy. Whilst the rest of the world is happily getting on with a 21st century life-style.

Are the cracks of the dictatorship of banks on society starting to become so wide that we need a new way of running things?

Would a greener system work better? Or socialism?

Or is there no perfect way and we just have to make the best of the bad bunch?

It’s a question I keep wondering about but I’m not a good enough economist to answer it...

Click to expand...

Not sure I understand all your question. What is the dictatorship of the banks that you talk about?

as for the rest
we have a regulated capitalist system, rather than a total capitalist system.
In my view we should be moving to a more regulated capitalist system (thats moving closer to socialism but is not socialism). Thats why I would class myself as left wing. those to the right want less regulation and movement towards a totally capitalist system.
I think even a regulated capitalist system is a bit shit, but I am not aware of any other system that is workable.

To explain it totally would need about 10,000 words but some examples are below

1) We should be moving to a free trade system but only with those nations that have the same/similar/equivalent welfare policy, H&S policy, environmental etc as we do.
2)Publicly traded companies senior management should have to hold significant stock within the company. This stock should not be able to be sold while the management is in place and for a number of years after the management has left the company.

It's not a closed system, so long term, no pure form of operation is permanently 'safe' from change and potential extinction.

What will probably happen is that it will evolve into something else with vestiges of capitalism left, the naming conventions of the new way being subject to whether or not the world still feels comfortable calling it, or elements of it, capitalism.

When I look at how I grew up and became aware of my surroundings (mid to late 60's) and on my street there were 3 corner shops - one at each end and one in the middle. And a Co-op down the hill where my mum did the shopping and collected the dividend stamps. It was early to mid 70's that the supermarkets arrived and the corner shops started to go one by one. Successful independent businesses began to be taken over by larger - but still local - businesses or entrepreneurs. Come Thatcher and regional businesses were then being taken over by national companies. And of course the wicked witch of Grantham flogged all that we as the people owned off to the highest bidder via share issues... Zoom on another decade or 3 and the national companies have been bought by the global companies.
So for capitalism to survive it has to keep evolving not only new products (think of vinyl to cassettes to CD to digital or Betamax to video to DVD to Blue Ray) but also in corporations getting bigger and bigger and cornering markets.
So once a corporation is global, where can they go? They can't gain any more ground. And once technology has ran out of new products to flog us (Apple spring to mind) or the public gets wise and refuses to follow the hype and advertising and doesn't bother buying the emperor's new clothes which these products are, then we will see a change in the capitalist system.
It's sheep we're up against